Comparative Insights Into Smallholder Agriculture in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan:A Field Study
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CSD Working Paper Series: Towards a New Indian Model of Information and Communications Technology-Led Growth and Development Comparative insights into smallholder agriculture in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan:A Field Study ICT India Working Paper #23 Abhishek Beriya February 2020 CSD Working Paper Series: Towards a New Indian Model of Information and Communications Technology-Led Growth and Development Abstract Field visits were undertaken to speak to farmers in some districts in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan to gain some qualitative insights about their current experiences with agriculture. The conversations were around production costs, prices of produce, economic viability of smallholder agriculture and agriculture extension services. Other issues connected to agriculture like landholding sizes, leasing of agricultural land, government policies and schemes for agriculture like minimum support prices (MSP), agriculture credit/Kisan Credit Cards(KCC), Soil health Cards (SHC), input subsidies etc., were also discussed. This paper summarises these free flowing discussions. Criticality of irrigation, comparisons between small and marginal farmers as compared to the slightly more landed farmers, agriculture being no longer remunerative enough and consequent disillusionment of farmers and youth with agriculture as a sole means of livelihood are general themes that emerge from these conversations. Paper concludes by elaborating these themes and observing that in spite of inadequate economic returns, smallholder agriculture in India remains significant for food security and livelihoods of our farmers in the absence of alternate and better remunerating economic opportunities. 1 CSD Working Paper Series: Towards a New Indian Model of Information and Communications Technology-Led Growth and Development Introduction: As a part of the agriculture team in the project titled –‘Towards a New Indian Model of ICT- Led Growth and Development’, being undertaken by the Centre for Sustainable Development, Columbia University, New York and TERI, New Delhi, I undertook 2 field visits to some districts in Uttar Pradesh (Unnao) and Rajasthan (Hanumangarh and Jhunjhunun). These districts were chosen primarily because they are not contiguous to a metro city like New Delhi or Bangalore and because of availability of non-institutional connections for introducing me to farmers so that the interaction could be devoid of any biases. The visits were conceptualised so that some qualitative insights concerning the actual ground situation prevalent in smallholder agriculture in India could be obtained. Hence the travels were aimed at meeting smallholder farmers and discussing with them about their experiences in production of crops and sale of those crops. This paper describes these conversations with farmers. At the beginning of the paper, I attempt to briefly review literature which pertains to smallholder agriculture in these 2 states Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Rajasthan and I also refer to relevant literature for agriculture at the national level as literature specific to these 2 states is limited. Following the literature review, a description of the conversations with farmers and relevant observations from the field visits is given. I conclude by summarising impressions from the discussions. As I have mentioned at the very outset, our visits were qualitative in nature and thus the data cited from the visits should be seen within that context. Literature Survey on Agriculture in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan: Bajpai and Volavka (2005), provide a detailed historical account of Agricultural Performance in Uttar Pradesh(UP) beginning in the early 1960s and examine in detail outputs and yields in UP in comparison to Punjab and Haryana, their more successful counterpart states in the Green revolution. They establish the importance of modern inputs in agriculture as the reason for the better performance of Punjab and Haryana as compared to Uttar Pradesh in agricultural efficiency. Basing on the inputs, they also examine in detail intrastate variation between Eastern UP and Western UP. They argue that the extent of variation in agricultural output is, to a large extent, explained by the use of inputs for modern agriculture, like technical variables, such as use of fertilizers, irrigation, and HYV seeds or environmental variables, such as rainfall, soil fertility and economic variables, such as size of land holdings, size of the markets and availability of power for agricultural use. However, they single out irrigation as the most significant variable, from the ones listed above to explain the differential agricultural performance of U.P. relative to Punjab and Haryana. They suggest that UP should make investments on irrigation, agricultural research and development, encourage diversification of crops, revamp its agricultural extension system to assist farmers in adopting new technologies and build up and promote rural infrastructure and agro-based industries. 2 CSD Working Paper Series: Towards a New Indian Model of Information and Communications Technology-Led Growth and Development S Mahendra Dev (2012) identifies roles, challenges and opportunities of smallholder agriculture in India. This study establishes that Indian small farmers contribute to both diversification and food security. Only in the cases of pulses and oilseeds, their share is lower than other farmers. It also shows that from efficiency point of view, small holdings are equal or better than large holdings. With the help of data, it points that smallholder basic consumption generally exceeds their income and thus indebtedness is a constant feature in the lives of smallholders. As far as challenges are concerned, role and vulnerability of women among the smallholder farmers, vulnerable social groupings like SCs and STs, land issues (tenure and security) , low educational achievement and skills, high levels of credit and indebtedness, globalization, climate change and water issues make smallholder farming risky and dangerous; they are also not able to go for diversification due to these constraints. Research and extension, bridging the yield gap between lab and actual field yields, post- harvest value addition, organic farming, wider public support for institutions of agriculture, collectivization initiatives, rural non-farm initiatives, more institutional credit support, farmers’ groups, rural infrastructure etc., should be focus areas to improve the lot of smallholder farmers. The same study also identifies the constraints of small holder agriculture. It states, “income from small and marginal farms is not enough to take care of daily consumption and they have to borrow to survive. Therefore, small holdings farmers have to get part of income from rural non-farm activities. Therefore, promotion of rural non- farm sector is essential for generating incomes for rural population. Poverty cannot be removed with 55% of workers in agricultural sector. Ultimately, many of the small and marginal farmers have to be shifted to rural non-farm sector and urban areas.” Ajit Kumar Singh (2013) has discussed the income levels and livelihood issues of farmers on the basis of a large field study in Uttar Pradesh. This study estimates the per-day per-capita income from agriculture to be Rs 15 for marginal farmers, Rs 31 for small farmers, Rs 45 for medium farmers and Rs 84 for large farmers for 2011-12. Thus, all marginal farmers, who constitute over three-fourths of UP farmers, fall below the poverty line of Rs 22 if they depend solely on agricultural income. Given the inadequacy of agricultural income to meet household expenditure, the small and marginal farmers have to devise livelihood strategy for their survival. Specifically, this study suggests: • Increase in agricultural productivity • Mixed Farming including scientific animal husbandry • Move workers from Agricultural to other sectors of economy and growth of non-farm economy • Improvement in rural services and skill development of rural youth • Improvement in rural infrastructure 3 CSD Working Paper Series: Towards a New Indian Model of Information and Communications Technology-Led Growth and Development Nilanjan Banik (2017) analyses interventions for smallholder farmers in Rajasthan and quantitatively evaluates 3 interventions: • Farm loan waiver • Provision of smooth supply chain management and cold storage facilities • Electronic markets The study quantifies the benefits of these interventions and summarises them as follows: BCR @ 5% Discount Rates Benefit (INR Costs (INR Time Horizon Intervention Quality of (BCR=Benefit Crore) Crore) of analysis Evidence Cost Ratio) Farm Loan 0.81 9,537 11,731 5 years Strong Waiver Cold chain 15.5 92,788 5,985 10 years Medium infrastructure Limited to E-Mandis 65 8,523 131 20 years Medium It is clear from the above that this study is clear in favour of electronic markets and development of cold chain infrastructure for which it estimates a high benefits to cost ration in comparison to farm loan waivers in which case it estimates a benefits cost ration lower than 1 for farmers and agriculture. Sarthak Gaurav and Srijit Mishra (2011), analyse size-class and returns to cultivation using nationally representative data from the Situation Assessment Survey of Farmers (SAS) of the 59th Round of the National Sample Survey, for the period 2002-03. Their empirical results, computed separately for kharif and rabi, at an aggregate all India level as also for each size- class indicate an inverse relationship between size-class and